[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The gstreamer third way

Somebody in the thread at some point said:

>>  - That is the end of the story for the typical case.  When KDE4 comes
>> or there is some other better resolution that allows it, Fedora just
>> starts using the GPL3 samba libs and goes on in a good clean way.
> If KDE4 will not be ready for F-9 timeframe I will do my best to have
> samba 3.2.x in Fedora anyway. Even if that means stopping linking
> libsmbclient into KDE.

Is it possible to use some LD_LIBRARY_PATH or somesuch to bind
libsmbclient only to the GPL2 samba libs in that case?

>>  - Additionally, completely externally, some other repo might offer a
>> standalone GPL3 samba libs package that has the same soname that
>> endusers might choose to use to replace Fedora's GPL2 library.  That's
>> up to them and the user's problem that his combined system may not be
>> redistributable if he goes down that path.
> This is not ideal nor desirable.

Nor is it under your control in the least -- it is out of scope for
Fedora by definition.  It's also *legitimate* if an enduser wants to
combine stuff in a nondistributable way (at least it is true for GPL2
era stuff, I don't fully apprehend the GPL3)... and indeed doesn't
distribute it.  I don't propose it should be done or anyone here has to
do or acknowledge or bless it, just that it is a real permutation that
can exist under the sun without violation.

>> If I understood it, this does not violate any terms or intention of the
>> terms and is nice and clean.
> It's not nice, nor 'clean'. KDE (I mean really Trolltech here as KDE
> people can't do much) at least starting discussing the problem would be
> nice an clean.

Well at least we seem to agree it doesn't violate anything.

Within the boundaries of what Fedora actually controls, it's clean.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]